Wandering Maroon
Registered User
- Sep 11, 2010
- 264
- 21
Proposal: Pacioretty for Brassard?
- Thread starter Wandering Maroon
- Start date
Captain Mountain
Formerly Captain Wolverine
- Jun 6, 2010
- 20,445
- 14,027
There's already a post here that has that, and if Montreal trades Pacioretty it'll be for futures, not another rental player.
justafan22
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2014
- 11,629
- 6,249
DramaticGloveSave
Voice of Reason
- Apr 17, 2017
- 14,643
- 13,358
I don't see how it's bad, as an Islanders fan(a team who needs a center) I would put more value in Brassard then Patches
justafan22
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2014
- 11,629
- 6,249
Why would a rebuilding team trade for an older player?
Prospects/picks, not roster players.
Brassard at the deadline again would fetch maybe a late 1st
strongcomp05
Registered User
- Jun 8, 2018
- 619
- 403
I think the value is fair but a rental C does nothing for them and tbh I'm not sure a rental winger does all that much for us.
Isn't PIT pretty happy to have a #3 C that can actually play? It was a serious issue for them before the deadline last season, from what I recall. Do you guys want that spot to be Sheahan again? Don't know why PIT would trade Brassard.
Also, Montreal doesn't need someone to help them win next season. They need long-term help. So why trade for short-term gain?
Also, Montreal doesn't need someone to help them win next season. They need long-term help. So why trade for short-term gain?
Pittsburg is contending for the cup, Montreal is contending for a top 5 picks. You guys should try and find a way to keep Brassard and add Pacioretty...
Something like Byron + Pacioretty @ 50% would make Pitts offense freaking scary. A trade around Hagelin + 1st + Addison + Hallander. Habs add a 3rd round pick.
Penguins save 0.58M. Byron is a similar player to Hagelin but a better scorer imo. Pacioretty would probably be the best sniper on Sid's wing since Hossa?
Pacioretty - Crosby - Hornqvist
Guentzel- Malkin - Rust
Byron - Brassard - Kessel
Simon, Cullen, Sheanan, Sprong, Ashton-Reese as depth and fighting for a 4th line spot.
strongcomp05
Registered User
- Jun 8, 2018
- 619
- 403
We can trade him again at the deadline. If we retain on him, we might be able to get a 2nd?
Also, makes the trade possible for Pitts salary wise.
madinsomniac
Registered User
Honestly this would be a trade and flip deal for montreal... based on the value of cost effective top six centers being much higher than wingers...
Looking at what you guys paid for 2 years of Brassard at 40% retained and what one playoff run of Nash and Kane got I would say it's a bit overblown... you're probably right for potential 1C or actual 1C. Brassard is a 2C and Paciorretty a 1st line LW. Pac has more impact on a game then Brassard imo.
go4hockey
Registered User
But that’s just the thing. In determining value you need to think of team needs. This deal does nothing for Montreal, except giving them a player they would want to move by the deadline.
If Pittsburgh really needs a winger... they can just put Brassard on LW, and move Sheahan to 3C. Brassard at LW might not be quite as good as Patches, but given that he can still be moved to center if needed easily makes up for that.
Personally unless Montreal was adding (and I can't see them adding anything that would actually sway me), I wouldn't touch this at all.
I don't think Pittsburgh goes through either Tampa, Caps or Leafs without adding to their line up. Hence, see post #12. I don't think Malkin/Crosby will have enough in the tank for the Penguins to be contenders in 3-4 years when those prospects/picks materialize into nhl players. You guys need to make one last push now, this year and next to win another one.
Paying top dollar from our limited prospect pool only makes me less fond of adding a rental winger tbh.
This is not top dollar. Top dollar would include Sprong.
It's :
Pacioretty 50% retained Vs late first + Addison
Byron (1.17M) + early 3rd Vs Hallander + Hagelin (4M)
I don't think the Habs have a lot of interest straight up, but if a deal around Pittsburghs First and Brassard became available I'd be interested. Even if we had to take a cap dump back in the deal.
Brassard lets Drouin move back to the wing, and if he has a decent year, maybe we end up with a 2nd 1st round pick out of the deal by the deadline.
Brassard lets Drouin move back to the wing, and if he has a decent year, maybe we end up with a 2nd 1st round pick out of the deal by the deadline.
IT was a serious issue up until Jan/Feb. But that was more so due to a lack of overall depth, not an issue with our then #3C Sheahan. From the time we acquired him until the TD when we acquired Brassard, Sheahan was on pace for 35+ points, and that's despite having 1pt in his first 10 games. He played really well for us once he settled in, but Pittsburgh just had terrible 4Cs, and thus we still were looking for a center. Rutherford choose to go with the overkill option and get a 2C to play 3C vs getting a 3/4C to play 4C.
If you don't think that Pittsburgh gets through Tampa/Toronto or Washington without adding, going from Brassard to Patches shouldn't be changing the equation all that much. Because while I think very highly of Patches as a winger, given Brassard's high skill level and overall versatility... the difference is likely very minimal. Especially given that the few times Brassard played with Crosby, that they looked very good.
I'm sure you would be. However there's a reason why Rutherford has said that Brassard will be seeing time on the wing (assuming LW because RW is stacked)... it's because there's not a chance in hell that he would add a 1st to Brassard for 1 yr of Patches. Most Pen fans wouldn't even do it 1-1 due to Brassard's ability to play center.
Actually I did. You said (and I quote) "I don't think Pittsburgh goes through either Tampa, Caps or Leafs without adding to their line up." Going from Brassard to Patches doesn't change things. And no Pittsburgh isn't going to gut their prospect pool just to add Patches and Byron at a cost of Hagelin ++.
And if you actually spent anytime watching Pittsburgh down the stretch (after the TD) and in the POs this year, you'd realize that Brassard and Sheahan as the 3/4C is actually an issue where Pittsburgh doesn't have enough icetime to get the best out of either of them. Moving Brassard to the wing and Sheahan to 3C solves that issue, while also giving Pittsburgh a stacked top 9, while still having a quality 4th line centered by Cullen.Assuming of course that Brassard can still be effective there, that Sheahan plays like he did last season and Cullen still has enough to be a quality 4C. However none of those are big asks.
Guentzel - Crosby - Hornqvist
Brassard - Malkin - Sprong/Rust
Hagelin - Sheahan - Kessel (or swap Hagelin & Brassard/Guentzel here)
ZAR/Simon - Cullen - Sprong/Rust
Still a very very good forward group, and it doesn't cost us any prospects. Pittsburgh has multiple lineup options if Brassard is playing LW, where they can still have one of Guentzel, Brassard and Kessel on different lines. And that still doesn't factor in what Sprong may (or may not) be able to do.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
BET ON ONLY ONE HORSE Sheepshead Bay Stakes (Gr. 2) BELMONT (AQUEDUCT) RACE 3Wagers: 2Staked: $159.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
